CONCERNING THE BULYGIN DUMA

RECORD OF DISCUSSION.
[Before October 17, 1905]

**Volgin.** "Substitution"... with L[enin] 2
Revolutioniz[e]...
from No. 409:
"revolutionary... overcoming of the Bulg[in] Duma".......3
[Deliberative] institutions] w[ere] present in
Fr[ance] and in Germ[any] 4
Conflict p[ossible] b[etween] a[utocracy]
and b[ourgeois]ie
M[artov]'s main
plan — r[evolutionary]
self-government] 5
{
This slogan cannot be im­plem­
ented
— appeal not to the Petrunke­
viches, but to the electors: if you
come forward as a revolutionary force.
Mandates will be an enormous gain
B[olsheviks] propose] to
w i t h d r a w, 6
Here is the essence
Moral: to divert
classes
1) b[ourgeois]ie d[emocratic]

2) revolutionary] p[etty] b[ourgeois]
ie
p[easants]n
3) pr[oletaria]t
"monarchical r[epub]l[ic]" >
slip of the tongue
Rifle [will knock out]
does not shoot
— butt
L
— fist
U
— teeth
J

LENIN COLLECTION

What is their t[acti]c?
1) p[articipation] in e[lectoral] a[ssembly]
all yes
2) for what purpose? what to p[ropaganid]ze]?
armed uprising.
3) sp[eak] of the elections of Foma or Ivan?
Yes. No 7.
Agreement
support
4) Conditions of support.
Cherevanin, P[arvus], Martov 8
5) Should [we] elect now by universal s[uffrage] r[evolutionary]
self-government]?
Yes. -(M[artov]).
6) Should [we] brand the b[ourgeois]ie as traitors, = conciliators?
S t a n i s l a v s k y  *.
Martov gave an answer to Lenin
From the side, r[evolutionary] phrases...  in advance in his
"agit[ational]"  article, knowing
but there is no analysis...  Lenin well,
[ad hominem: with P[etrunke]v[ich's] attitude]
R[evolutionary] m[ovement] em[anates] from adventure||...
R[evolutionary] b[ourgeois] or social?
The bourgeoisie makes the bourgeois r[evolution], of course,
the proletariat will play a role, but... even with the p[easantry]
hastily...
"We must wring the necks of the b[ourgeois]ie
{{Stakh[ov]ich[es] and have their own merits".}} 9
{Uprising] if it were so near}
{{90% on armed uprising}}
|Armed Uprising = the paradise of Mohammed |
II
One must organize forces, not in agreement!|
\The Pr[oletaria]t will be able to say halt!
D. P. Kalagatsky. Ed.

RECORD OF DISCUSSION ON LENIN'S REPORT ON THE PARTY'S TACTICS

|| |armed from head to foot!!

**Mishin.** T[acti]c of b[oycott] pressure toward armed uprising

Careful treatment of the State D[uma]
will paralyze the uprising....
If the St[ate] D[uma] remains, then w e s h a l l... 
(M[artov] against this view).

**Fedorov.** Is it really possible to say that one still needs to
raise morale.......
["malice"]
L[enin] "is satisfied". (I)
We do not forget about the class str[uggle] of the proletariat.
Z[emstvo] camp[aign] was again a pleasure
... The proletariat entered by force into the z[emstvo] halls..."
|L[enin] spoke sharp words against the z[emsk]o] campaign.|
Consciousness is not introduced from without, but from all of social life.
P[lekha]n[o]v in the f a m o u s  letter 10
In The Dawn Lenin said that he would support any liberal
demands and.
j Hold
{  "Temporary
revolutionary
government" will do everything
}
I FEW RED WORDS, WHAT WE NEED ARE DIRECTIVES I

In № 10 "Forward" speaks of the tr[ansformation] of the State
D[uma] into a Constituent A[ssembly]
from the article by V. S. from C[onstituent] Assembly to Convention 12
In debt: Pl[ekha]n[o]v got into a mess
[Marx too was a m[enshevik]| 13

Dunaevsky

Appendix.
1654

QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER.

1) How is an alliance with socialist-revolutionaries and radicals for an armed uprising better than an alliance with liberals and other elements bypassed by the Duma, in order to achieve elections on the basis of direct, secret, and other electoral rights?

2) Where does Parvus say that the proletariat, supporting the better part of the bourgeoisie, does not know that on the whole and in general the bourgeoisie is its future enemy?

3) Does propaganda and agitation among radical-democratic elements have greater chances than propaganda and agitation for a constituent assembly*?

4) Will the Bolsheviks take violent measures to disperse the electors and prevent elections from taking place, or will they limit themselves only to propaganda for armed uprising?

5) Does Comrade Lenin think that "active boycott" will bring the moment of uprising closer? Can one hope to be a witness to a revolutionary uprising before the convening of the State Duma?

If yes, the question of attitude toward the St. D. loses its acuteness; if no, will a more revolutionary composition of the Duma not create a more revolutionary atmosphere?

Does the slogan put forward by "The Spark" of organizing revolutionary self-government of the people alongside pressure on electors not respond to the complexity and duality of the moment?

6) To the Chairman of the Meeting.

I earnestly request Comrade Lenin to dwell, if possible in greater detail, on that passage from his pamphlet "What Is To Be Done?" which speaks of the introduction of consciousness from without and which the Menshevik opponent touched upon.

A Bolshevik.

1 In Len. Coll. V, 401, Lenin's "Plan of the Report" is printed from one of the foreign colonies in the autumn of 1905. A comparison of the printed here record of discussion of the report and of the notes submitted to the speaker shows that all these materials relate to one and the same report. The main theme of the report in developed form is given in a series of articles (see, for example, Works VIII, 166—177 and 296—309). As an appendix we give the notes submitted to Lenin during his report.

2 The opponent Volgin, speaking of "substitution," was probably referring to the words of Martyanov in № 102 of "The Spark" to the effect that Lenin "imperceptibly substituted the concept: revolution and dictatorship." Lenin in "Two Tactics" (Works VIII, 115 and 119) wrote on this subject: ""Forward" and "Proletarian" 'substitute' the concept of revolution and dictatorship. "The Spark" does not want such 'substitution'... You have said quite by accident a great truth. You have confirmed with a new formulation our proposition that "The Spark" trails in the wake of the revolution, lapses into a liberation formulation of its tasks, while "Forward" and "Proletarian" give slogans that lead forward the democratic revolution." Lenin concludes the question of "substitution" with the following words: "... when the democratic bourgeoisie or petty bourgeoisie rises yet another step, when it becomes a fact not only that there is revolution, but that revolution has completely triumphed,—then we will 'substitute' (perhaps amid terrible outcries of new future Martyanovs) the slogan of democratic dictatorship for the slogan of socialist dictatorship of the proletariat, i.e., of complete socialist transformation."

3 The words: "revolutionary overcoming of the Bulygin Duma" are taken from Martov's article "On the Order of the Day. Boycott of the Bulygin Duma and Revolutionary Self-Government of the People" in № 109 of "The Spark" from September 11 (August 29), 1905.

4 According to the Manifesto of August 19 (6), 1905, the Bulygin Duma was not a legislative but only a "consultative" organ.

5 Criticism of the Menshevik slogan "revolutionary self-government" see Works VIII, 172—175 and 308—309.

6 In № 108 of "The Spark" from August 26 (13) there is a large article "Our Tactics and the State Duma." It falls into two parts: first comes a letter to the editorial office by Cherevanin, and then a lengthy postscript by F. Dan. In this postscript an accusation is leveled against the Bolsheviks of their alleged desire to abstain from active participation in the Duma campaign, of "absenteeism," "non-intervention," of the theory of "abstention," of the theory of "crossed arms." See on this Lenin Works VIII, 166—167.

7 In № 110 of "The Spark" from September 23 (10), 1905, Parvus in the article "Social Democracy and the State Duma" wrote: "Instead of arguing about whether to elect Ivan Fomich or Foma Ivanovich, they (the workers. Ed.) posed the question of political questions. Here we can discuss both the politics of the government, and the tactics of the liberals, and the class struggle, the State Duma itself. All this leads to the revolutionization of the masses." See on this Works VIII, 219.

8 On the comparison of the positions of Martov, Cherevanin, and Parvus see Lenin Works VIII, 212, 273, 299, 316, Len. Coll. V, 418, Len. Coll. XVI, 196, 223.

9 In Lenin's article in № 16 of "The Spark" from February 14 (1), 1902, "Political Agitation and 'the Class Standpoint,'" it is stated: "... It is necessary to carefully observe all and every collision with the government by any social stratum whatsoever; precisely because of the 'class standpoint' it is impermissible for a social-democrat to remain indifferent to the discontent and protests of the Stakhovich[es]" (Works IV, 305).

10 Refers to the well-known pamphlet by Plekhanov "On Our Tactics Concerning the Struggle of the Liberal Bourgeoisie against Tsarism" (Geneva, 1905). The pamphlet had the subtitle: "Letter to the Central Committee" (Plekhanov. Works XIII). On Lenin's view of Plekhanov's pamphlet see Len. Coll. V, 61—63.

11 Refers to Lenin's article "The Persecutors of the Zemstvo and the Hannibals of Liberalism" in № 2—3 of "The Dawn" (December 1901). See Works IV, 119—157.

12 In № 10 of "Forward" from March 15 (2), 1905, there appeared an article by V. Filatov-Severtsev (under the signature V. S.) "The Zemsky Sobor and Our Politics." In the concluding paragraph of the article it was stated: "Our first task concerning the Zemsky Sobor will be to kindle the inevitable c o n f l i c t between it and the tsar's government and to transform, with the help of popular uprising, the Zemsky Sobor into a National Assembly, which will itself be compelled under the pressure of revolutionary politics to yield place to another, truly Constituent Assembly; but we will not abandon for a moment the action of the armed people, for only under its pressure can one pass from the Constituent Assembly to the Convention,—from autocracy to a republic."

13 Plekhanov in the article "On the Question of the Seizure of Power" in № 96 of "The Spark" from April 18 (5), 1905, wrote: "... it is not 'The Spark,' but 'Forward' that preaches opportunism—and moreover the worst, most harmful opportunism... Marx and Engels would have condemned the tactics of 'Forward' and approved the tactics of 'The Spark'" (Plekhanov. Works XIII, 211).

Lenin's criticism of this article by Plekhanov was given in his report at the Third Congress and in the article "On the Temporary Revolutionary Government" (Works VII, 262—272 and 314—323; see also Len. Coll. V, 252—257 and 302—306).
